Abstract:
Over the past year, a good deal of media attention has been paid to research that suggests the American public is not persuaded by the reasons the United States continues to invest in its civil space program, particularly the plans to return humans to the Moon and then to Mars as described in the Vision for Space Exploration (VSE). The studies done by Dittmar Associates and others have found that, while the public as a whole continues to endorse NASA and to endorse human space exploration, it simultaneously questions the relevance of the national space program and the VSE.
Much of the interest in these results has focused on the particular finding that young Americans are disengaged from NASA and the VSE. As a result, there has been a good deal of discussion in public forums and in print and electronic media about how to “reach” young people – i.e., what media channels and technologies are most effective in communicating messages about NASA and the VSE, with the goal of re-engaging those in the 18-25 (and other) age groups. This effort is laudable, and NASA is taking it seriously; among other things, NASA videos are now showing up on YouTube, which is wildly popular among internet users in that cohort. NASA also has allocated some resources to developing a framework for strategic communications, and to doing additional research to help guide specific message development and media use.
However, discussions of how to reach young people – and everyone else – have, with just a few exceptions, missed the more important point: “What” is communicated must have value to the audience. If it does not, then “how” it is presented will matter little in the long run. Put another way, the U.S. government is asking the American public to invest in the space program, and the public in return wants to know what its “Return on Investment” (ROI) is, and will be, for the duration of the decades-long effort envisioned in the VSE. If this question is not answered satisfactorily, then sustaining the VSE over the next several years is in doubt.
This paper revisits and updates the research done between 2004 and 2007, with new findings that clarify the issues of relevance and value. It explores implications of the results for strategic communications planning, as well as for program development and the incorporation and communication of value to American policy makers and the public.
Dittmar, Mary Lynne.
Sustainability, Strategic Communications, and Relevance: Why YouTube Won’t Get Us to Mars.
Paper presented to the AIAA SPACE 2007 Conference & Exposition, 18 – 20 September 2007, Long Beach, CA.
Related posts:
- YouTube: Contagious Communications. body {background-repeat: no-repeat;}Introduction The Google-owned Web site YouTube (www.youtube.com) has...
- From Protests to Litigation to YouTube: A Longitudinal Case Study of Strategic Lobby Tactic Choice for the Buffalo Field Campaign. Shanahan, Elizabeth A., Mark K. McBeth, Linda Tigert, and Paul...
- Congress and the ‘YouTube War’. body {background-repeat: no-repeat;}Excerpt Congress and the ‘YouTube War’ The level...
- Nielsen: YouTube is from Mars, Streaming Video is from Venus. body {background-repeat: no-repeat;}“There is a gender split when it comes...
- Communication, Power and Counter-power in the Network Society. body {background-repeat: no-repeat;}Abstract This article presents a set of grounded...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
